From: Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>
Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 12:02:01 +0800
To: cypherpunks@EINSTEIN.ssz.com
Subject: http:--www.cnn.com-TECH-9705-04-web.libel.ap-
Message-ID: <199705050307.WAA00242@einstein.ssz.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


    CNN logo 
   navigation 
   
   Infoseek/Big Yellow 
   
   
   Pathfinder/Warner Bros 
   
   
   
   
   Tech banner Puzzled about doing real business on the Web? 
   
     rule
     
              CAUTION: ANYTHING YOU POST MAY BE USED AGAINST YOU
                                       
      Libel May 4, 1997
     Web posted at: 9:51 p.m. EDT (0151 GMT)
     
     In this story:
     * When slander becomes libel
     * Privacy issues 
     * E-mail can make it a federal issue 
     * The wrath of large corporations 
       
     
     
     (AP) -- When the Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment
     protectingfreedom of the press, they never imagined millions of
     Americanswould someday have their own version of one sitting in
     their backrooms.
     
     But with the advent of the World Wide Web, that's exactly whathas
     happened. And from this revolution has emerged a new legalquandary:
     Just what standards are private individuals to be held towhen it
     comes to what they "publish" on the millions of Web pagesand other
     online forums that serve as the world's soapbox?
     
     To a great extent, the answer thus far is this: No one knows.With
     the Web revolution less than 3 years old, a body of case lawhasn't
     yet been built up. But lawyers who study online issues dohave some
     observations -- and advice.
     
     
     
   When slander becomes libel
  
     
     
     First off, they note, the line between slander, once the realmof
     individuals, and libel, the bane of publishers, has beenblurred. It
     used to be that spreading malicious gossip aboutsomeone down at the
     barbershop could lead to charges of slander.But slander, by
     definition spoken, was hard to prove and generallydidn't reach
     enough people to do any major harm.
     
     Post that same information where it can be read by millionsonline,
     however, and you've suddenly entered the realm of libel --governed
     by stricter laws originally written to cover printpublications.
     
     "Let's face it," says Mark Rasch, director of informationsecurity
     law and policy at the Center for Information Protection atScience
     Applications International Corp. in McLean, Virginia. "If I wereto
     print up a handbill saying bad things about my neighbor thatwere
     false, at most I could distribute a couple of hundred of them.With
     the Web, I can now damage his reputation worldwide."
     
     The law is clear: Libel consists of publishing a false anddefamatory
     statement about an identifiable person, causing injuryto the
     subject's reputation. Often tied to it is the legal notionof
     defamation, defined as that which exposes a person to
     hatred,ridicule or contempt, causing them to be shunned or injuring
     theirbusiness or calling.
     
     Truth is always a defense against libel, so if your Web pagesays
     someone has two heads and they do, you're fine. But saythey're a
     murderer and you can expect someone to come asking forsome proof --
     and possibly a bill for damages if you don't have any.
     
     
     
   Privacy issues
  
     
     
     Then, there's invasion of privacy. It's one thing to pass alonga
     juicy bit of gossip to a friend. It's quite another to post it tothe
     Web.
     
     "Let's say, for instance, you disclose some private fact
     aboutsomebody -- say, their medical records. Or you snuck into
     theirhouse and took a nudie photo of them and put it up on the Net.
     Thatwould be a no-no under civil law and they could sue for
     damages,"says David Banisar, staff counsel for the Electronic
     PrivacyInformation Center in Washington, D.C.
     
     Although few of these cases have actually gone to court,
     lawyersoften are called in when things get ugly.
     
     "I know of a few cases where the ex-husband and ex-wife havegone
     after each other on the Net," Banisar says. "In oneinstance, the
     ex-wife put up a diatribe page on what a scumbag hewas and how he
     wasn't paying his child support -- and gave out hisphone number so
     suitably angry women could take it up with him."
     
     Remember, too, that the Internet's reach magnifies everything inthe
     eyes of the law.
     
     
     
   E-mail can make it a federal issue
  
     
     
     Shouting "You jerk, I'm gonna belt you one!" at a carelessdriver who
     runs over your mailbox won't get you into trouble. Butposting the
     threat on the Internet is dangerous. It's all aquestion of reach:
     Anything done over a telecommunications deviceis automatically an
     interstate communication.
     
     "This suddenly makes it a federal issue if you e-mail,"Banisar
     warns.
     
     State statutes vary, but when federal laws come into effect,
     anycommunication containing a threat to kidnap or injure a
     personcarries with it the possibility of imprisonment up to five
     years ora fine of up to $1,000.
     
     And an entirely different level of concern pops up when theobject of
     the threat is an elected official. Like the "no jokes"signs posted
     by airport metal detectors, the FBI has no sense ofhumor when it
     comes to threatening officeholders.
     
     "We can't forget all those idiots arrested for sending threatsto the
     president. So don't send threats to the president overe-mail. It's a
     federal crime," Banisar says.
     
     Fraud is another sticking point. It's illegal everywhere, ofcourse.
     But the Federal Trade Commission has taken an especiallyhard line
     against fraud on the Net. Send a snail-mail chain letterasking for
     money and you might get a call from postal authorities.Try it on the
     Web, however, and you'll be investigated by the FTCforces who track
     online scammers.
     
     
     
   The wrath of large corporations
  
     
     
     But in the end, the biggest vulnerability of any self-publisheron
     the Web is probably the wrath of large corporations.
     
     You can say their logos are ugly and their presidents are jerksand
     they don't flinch. But try using any variety of a heavilytrademarked
     name or image on your site and watch the injunctionsflow.
     
     Generally speaking, it's other businesses who get into trouble.But,
     once in a while, an individual will set out to make a point --and
     get a legally phrased e-mail in response. Several cases haveresulted
     in Web sites' being taken down, including individuals whoposted
     statements against Kmart and McDonald's.
     
     Overall, remember that putting words or pictures up on your Webpage
     is just like publishing them in the newspaper.
     
     Use Rasch's simple test: "What you should avoid putting on theWeb is
     the same stuff you'd avoid putting on leaflets and handingout on the
     street."
     
     Copyright 1997   The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This
     material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or
     redistributed. 
     rule
     
  Related sites and stories:
  
     * The Communications Decency Act: Related sites and stories - June
       12, 1996
       
     
     
     External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive. rule
     
     Watch these shows on CNN for more sci-tech stories:
     
     CNN Computer Connection | Future Watch | Science & Technology Week
     rule Message Boards 
     
  Sound off on our message boards
  
     Tell us what you think!
     
     You said it... [INLINE] Puzzled about doing real business on the
     Web? rule
     
   
   To the top 
   
   (c) 1997 Cable News Network, Inc.
   All Rights Reserved.
   
        Terms under which this service is provided to you.